Residents and environmental groups urge pause on ash recycling as board adopts consent including item 5F

The Palm Beach County Solid Waste Authority adopted its consent agenda, including agenda item 5F concerning an aggregate-recovery project tied to incinerator ash, by a 6-0 vote. During matters by the public, three speakers urged the board to pause the item and seek more study and public disclosure before approving any reuse of ash.

Linda Smith, a member of the Sierra Club Loxahatchee Group, told the board that she was “a little vague on some of the details” of item 5F and asked whether the $25,000–$30,000 in expected revenue was for testing or for reuse. Smith added, “please do not consider using it as a road bed,” and urged the board to clarify how ash would be contained and protected from groundwater.

Mike Ewell, a solid waste consultant who said he authored the report the board received, urged the board to remove item 5F from the consent agenda and “table it for deeper consideration,” citing failed ash-recycling projects in other states and current reviews by state health agencies. Ewell told the board that scientific studies and recent EPA commentary suggest ash can leach arsenic, lead and cadmium in real-world conditions and that inhalation, ingestion or skin contact are exposure routes not fully captured by short-term leach tests.

Maxine Lobel, leader of the Florida chapter of Elders Climate Action and a Sierra Club member, said the potential toxins from incineration “are going to harm us, our environment, food, water, land, everything,” and urged the authority to consider waste-reduction alternatives rather than expanding incineration.

Authority staff did not remove item 5F from the consent agenda at the meeting. The board adopted the full consent agenda by voice vote; the clerk recorded the motion as carrying 6-0. The motion to adopt the agenda was made earlier in the meeting by Commissioner Weiss and seconded by Commissioner Flores; the clerk recorded the final consent vote as 6-0.

Speakers and advocates at the meeting pointed to a report presented to the board (the “It’s Not Green” report) and to federal and state-level reviews of ash reuse and incineration. Ewell said portions of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s guidance were under reconsideration and that states and counties elsewhere have backed away from or rejected ash-reuse schemes.

The board did not take separate action to remove or delay item 5F at the meeting. Public commentators asked the authority to provide additional modeling, monitoring frequency data, contract safeguards (including “put-or-pay” clauses) and an explicit waste‑reduction plan before the county commits to long-term contracts or technology investments.